• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Florida Stand Your Ground Shooting

I got this email from Andrew Branca today:

"
Hey folks,

If you missed the live broadcast of today's "Law of Self Defense Show," good news: the free viewing period for the recording of that episode is now available, but only through tomorrow (Thursday) night!

Today's show had us step through the video of the police interview of Michael Drejka, the Florida handicap parking spot shooter, to illustrate the dangers of engaging with professional interrogators.

The recording of today’s show is now up for free viewing, available through tomorrow evening, here:

http://www.lawofselfdefense.com/show"
 
Qwikdraw45 said:
Down here now. The SYG law, as written, is great if you are legally defending yourself. In this case, even though thug Markeis shoved the person to the ground, when the person on the ground (Drejka) drew his firearm, Markeis appears to be retreating. It is at that point that Drejka shoots him. As much as I support the current SYG law, if the SA were to charge him (Drejka), and I was on a jury, I'd vote to convict. Still, play thug games; win thug prizes.
Click to expand...

Thank goodness there are people like me who would vote to acquit, thereby getting a hung the jury.
 
Guilty of manslaughter...

Clearwater, Florida (CNN)Michael Drejka, who fatally shot an unarmed man, Markeis McGlockton, last summer in Florida during a dispute over a handicapped-accessible parking spot, was found guilty of manslaughter Friday night.

The judge set the sentencing date for October 10. Drejka faces up to 30 years in prison.
Drejka, who didn't take the witness stand, tried unsuccessfully to use Florida's "stand your ground' law as a defense for justifiable homicide. The case renewed a nationwide debate on the controversial law.
Jury deliberations lasted about six hours, with a brief pause around 9:30 p.m. when jurors sought clarification on the instructions for deciding guilt or innocence.

Michael Drejka found guilty of manslaughter in parking lot shooting that led to 'Stand Your Ground' trial - CNN
 
“But surveillance video shows McGlockton taking several steps back in the moments before the fatal shot -- a point on which police have challenged Drejka.
"What happens if I told you that I looked at the video and at no time and point does he come running up toward you? He actually takes a step back," Det. Richard Redman asks Drejka the day of the shooting.”
 
Prosecutor Scott Rosenwasser said during closing arguments earlier Friday that Drejka provoked McGlockton to shove him by yelling at Jacobs instead of calling the police if he felt so strongly about her being parked in the handicapped spot. Testimony showed he had confronted a septic truck driver for parking in the same spot months earlier, leading to an argument.

“He is a parking lot vigilante,” Rosenwasser said.

Defense attorney John Trevena told the jurors such comments are ridiculous. Drejka retired in his 30s from his tree-trimming job because of health problems.

“Does he look like Charles Bronson in ‘Death Wish’?” he asked, referring to the 1974 action movie. “This isn’t a vigilante.”
180813-white-man-charged-fatal-shooting-01.jpg


​
Actually, in the photo he looks pretty much exactly like Charles Bronson in Death Wish.

maxresdefault.jpg
Lawyer should probably have shut up a little.
 
Unless the law has changed, the 10-20-life law will get him 25. 10 for using a crime in a felony, 20 for discharging the weapon, 25 for for shooting someone - and the prosecutor is the only one who can waive the minimum. God help the shooter if the round was fired across racial lines.
 
I just sat back and watched.... 0:04, Deceased shoves shooter. Draw takes about 10 frames, begins in 0:07 and finishes in 0:08. Immediately upon the beginning of the draw, the deceased talks 3 steps backwards and turns right, about 30 degrees. He does not advance towards the shooter. There is a 1.5-2 second pause between completion of the draw and the deceased recoils from being shot.

What is boils down to for me, is if he drew and immediately fired, self defense all day. But he drew and paused as the guy backed up, and then shot him. This is one of those cases where the firearm caused the threat to back off. Pulling the trigger was not necessary at the point in time he fired.

This is just my opinion. I acknowledge that time dilates for the human mind when the adrenaline goes into our system. We must always remember we will judged with the benefit of hindsight when our actions were performed without it.
 
Stand your ground alright. More like sit your ground and have target practice with a live target. The man was no longer a threat. It was a 1 on 1 fight to begin with. Get up, pick up your fists and be a f***ing man and swing back. If not walk away. This is some cowardly behavior and their is no other way to break it down. He killed a man because he was shoved. Grow a pair of balls.

Once the firearm was pulled, the perp was no longer a threat. He took 4 steps back, turned away in clear fear and was in no way any longer the aggressor. At that point the man on the ground became the aggressor and abused that power. But no jail sentence will equal the restless nights knowing he took a man's life over a shove. I support SYG laws adamantly, if you are being attacked you have every right to defend yourself by any means necessary but this man was no longer being attacked, he isn't standing his ground and nor was his life ever in jeopardy. This law needs to be refined and assessed properly. People like this give responsible gun owners a bad name. He wasn't being jumped, he wasn't being stabbed. He was shoved once. Anyone who considers this a lawful shooting is a beta male. I really think this was a real botch.
 
Last edited:
MassachussettsMosinNagant said:
Stand your ground alright. That's a 1 on 1 fight. Get up, pick up your fists and be a f***ing man. This is come coward behavior and their is no other way to break it. He killed a man because he was shoved. Grow a pair of balls.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but he was shoved really hard!
 
However, it did look like the guy was probably going to smack him around a bit until he cleared leather. He hitched up his pants and started towards the guy
 
While I agree that the threat had ended before the shot was fired, I think there is a larger issue with this case.

The shooter was yelling at a woman who was in her car with small children. He was yelling at her because he did not like the way she parked. There was no previous confrontation between them, and he has acknowledged that he really doesn't like it when people park that way. Some people are calling this "the parking lot vigilante shooting," and it seems like that description is fair. Witnesses have suggested that while he did not physically attack the woman, he seemed both unhinged and threatening.

So this creates a truly difficult situation. I think most of us feel that if a man closely approaches a female family member, and begins yelling at her, that he needs to be dealt with. I don't think a man can behave this way, and then say, I never touched her, so I am non-violent, and the other guy really started the fight. I also don't think he should have been violently shoved just for yelling, but he really did initiate the whole thing, and PSGWSP.

So my gut feeling is that the shooter started the aggression, even if he did not throw a punch, and that the resulting violence is mutual combat. And I think it is generally understood that if someone dies as a result of mutual combat, then the winner of the fight has committed homicide.

Of course, I was not on the jury, and I have not studied every bit of the associated evidence, so it is possible my viewpoint is skewed. But I am very troubled by any attempt to claim self defense by someone who initiated an aggressive confrontation. My gut feeling is that the shooter really did initiate combat and is responsible for all of the consequences.
 
When the details come out of shooting like this I like to put myself in each persons shoes.

The shooter started the whole thing and was being an idiot. I bet he never would have confronted the dead man had he not been armed in the first place. He seems pretty trigger happy.

Note to self: don't be an idiot.

Note to self #2: especially don't be an idiot when armed (you will be held to a higher standard)


I am not an idiot when armed or unarmed - but a smarter person can still learn from other peoples mistakes.

If the shooter read Mas Ayoob or Andrew Branca's books or taken some legal use of force CCW classes - he would have never found himself in this situation.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
Not in Florida. A win in the criminal case insulates one from a civil case.
Click to expand...
Misleading.

Florida statute 776.032 bestows criminal and civil immunity
only if a court rules that a defendant's use of force was justified.

Counterexample: someone who is lucky enough to skate merely because of
jury nullification or just plain old innocence doesn't get insulation.

Implication: if the case goes to the jury, the defendant can be sued.

Proof: Z-man's lawyers ultimately didn't request a pre-trial self-defense hearing.
During the trial they didn't obviously ask the judge for a self-defense ruling.
Regardless of whether they asked for a ruling, they didn't get one:
the case went to the jury, which found Zimmerman not guilty.

After the trial, Z's lawyer said...
Trial of George Zimmerman: Public Response
...
Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara said that if anyone tries to sue Zimmerman, "we will seek and we will get civil immunity in a civil hearing, and we will see just how many civil lawsuits have spawned from this fiasco".
...​

FWIW, USA Today (like other media sources) wrote:
Zimmerman's business with the court may not be over

"Not guilty" does not necessarily mean George Zimmerman's legal trials are over. The Justice Department is investigating, and Trayvon Martin's family could sue in civil court.
...​
Note well: that's the lede.
=====

It's nice that Florida law provides a pathway for keeping lawsuits at bay,
but it makes sense that a vanilla criminal trial verdict of not guilty wouldn't suffice.

After all, it's easier for a plaintiff to establish that a preponderance of the evidence
agrees with their case than it is for a prosecutor to establish that
there is no reasonable doubt that their case is correct.

Just ask OJ.
 
Agnotology said:
I just sat back and watched.... 0:04, Deceased shoves shooter. Draw takes about 10 frames, begins in 0:07 and finishes in 0:08. Immediately upon the beginning of the draw, the deceased talks 3 steps backwards and turns right, about 30 degrees. He does not advance towards the shooter. There is a 1.5-2 second pause between completion of the draw and the deceased recoils from being shot.

What is boils down to for me, is if he drew and immediately fired, self defense all day. But he drew and paused as the guy backed up, and then shot him. This is one of those cases where the firearm caused the threat to back off. Pulling the trigger was not necessary at the point in time he fired.

This is just my opinion. I acknowledge that time dilates for the human mind when the adrenaline goes into our system. We must always remember we will judged with the benefit of hindsight when our actions were performed without it.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Bad shoot. I feel for him. But he didn’t need to shoot when he did. The attack was NOT “on going”. Played stupid games on both sides, paying a stupid high price on both sides, lose lose all around
 
Last edited:
MGnoob said:
You yell at someone you may get assaulted, you assault somone you may get shot.

The argument that the shooter should have called the police isn’t right. the attacker should have called the police rather then shove the shooter...

The fact that he pause for a second before firing is also not correct.

If he had shot before identifying the correct person, he could have shot the wrong person.

Are you suppose to just draw shoot from the hip and not aim? It’s not possible for the shooter to know what the attacker next move would be... only that he was already under attack.
Click to expand...

Are we.. are we doing this again? Alright, I’ll bite.
Shoving someone isn’t grounds for being shot, anywhere. He didn’t pursue after the shove, he didn’t go in for a ground and pound, or try to kick him, or stand over him menacingly, or anything other than shove the guy yelling at his wife and kid. Cranky guy with a gun, went looking for a fight(on multiple occasions) found one, and killed a guy. Now he’s going to prison as a direct result of his bad shoot, and rightly so.
 
Last edited:
MGnoob said:
The fact that he pause for a second before firing is also not correct.

If he had shot before identifying the correct person, he could have shot the wrong person.

Are you suppose to just draw shoot from the hip and not aim? It’s not possible for the shooter to know what the attacker next move would be... only that he was already under attack.

There likely is more to the story, other facts may come out... but from the video I can’t say the shorter was wrong... likely an a**h***.
Click to expand...

My point with the pause is that his draw was immediately on the guy. He drew without looking away from the target. Which means he saw the retreat. Not justified, IMO
 
was there any audio. Because it looks like the guy who got shot had some mouth up and until that trigger was pulled.

Maybe what people should take away from this is not to push other people to the ground.
 
robjax said:
was there any audio. Because it looks like the guy who got shot had some mouth up and until that trigger was pulled.

Maybe what people should take away from this is not to push other people to the ground.
Click to expand...

The lesson for both is de-escalation. Nobody has clean hands here. Don't be a vigilante meter maid. Don't shove someone to the ground over words. And don't shoot someone backing away from the gun you produced
 
Here's a notion that would torture Drejka until the end of his days(*),
if only it occurred to him:

If only he'd merely brandished from his position of pain on the asphalt,
the world might have been treated to the most epic security cam video
of asses-and-elbows(**) since Nope Badger.
Everyone would still be laughing about it over cigars and cognac.
But no - he pulled the bang switch.
=====

(*) Drejka doesn't strike me as someone that's gonna last long in gen. pop. at prison.

(**) Scroll past the Dobie Gillis stanza of the post to read about asses-and-elbows.
 
I think the main issue is we have all evolved into a society where grown men are scared of picking up their fists and fighting like men. I'm sick of trigger happy morons giving real gun owners a bad name. I mean their is no reason the shooter couldn't have gotten off his ass and swung like a man if he had that much of a problem. But he was a bitch. Let's not beat around the bush. He was a beta male coward. He knew he had no chance of standing his ground so he killed a guy because he was upset he got shoved and looked like a pussy in front of everyone instead of walking away with his loss. If anything I think the deceased man was more in grounds for a stand your ground scenerio had he had a gun. This attack was full out premeditated. Which made him look even more of a pussy and a guilty one at that.

The way this situation should have unraveled.

Firstly, Shooter doesn't approach the car until the man is out of the store. Don't be ignorant enough to start yelling at some man's woman while he's in the store and expect to not get a beating. Handle your business man to man or not at all. Once you approach someone's car and are yelling at someone's wife. It's just primal what defense mechanisms that instills in a man. And I can't say I wouldn't shove someone if they are yelling at my wife. Because coming at someone's woman in an aggressive tone is automatic red flag to defend your family. And you're asking to get punched or worst. So straight from that he is the aggressor.

Wait for the boyfriend to get out of the store. And approach him calmly like a man. Address the issue. Let him know of the parking spot and whatever impact it has on your commute.

If he acts like a thug which he most likely would because it's so petty to come at someone over a parking spot. You have 2 options. Walk away if you are a bitch or fight him like a man. He is unarmed and you are on even playing field.

Thirdly, Call the cops if you need to. Shoot him if they try jumping you, attacking you with a weapon. Or attack you while you are on the retreat. All justifable grounds to shoot him. But no after a shove.


Glad he got booked for manslaughter. And rightfully so.
 

Similar threads

Florida law allowing residents to stand their ground against ‘crack bears’ is one step closer to reality
Replies
10
Views
301
Sf Becket
Sf Becket
Woman allegedly went on Florida highway shooting spree ‘directed by God’ in relation to the solar eclipse
Replies
21
Views
406
Da_lucche
Da_lucche
Mall of NH shooting
2
Replies
50
Views
2K
hunt4riches
H
Interesting shooting video
Replies
2
Views
160
peterk123
P
SD shooting in Chicopee, MA
Replies
1
Views
210
VTski4x4
VTski4x4
Back
Top Bottom